MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

is that the default terminal? remember iTerm2 is not the default terminal

I can confirm that it is the default terminal.

b1048546 wrote:

Intel's Core i9-12900HK has 4 extra E cores compared to M1, and those cores DO provide performance. This performance is VERY similar to M1 Pro (10 core). This chip has 14 cores, 8+6 compared to 8+2 for M1 Pro/Max.

But how about other aspects, such as energy efficiency?

sorry for nustalgia but i had to


Archive

{what method did you use::control hat
answer on profile ::motion
} ::operators

helloworldbyeworld wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

Intel's Core i9-12900HK has 4 extra E cores compared to M1, and those cores DO provide performance. This performance is VERY similar to M1 Pro (10 core). This chip has 14 cores, 8+6 compared to 8+2 for M1 Pro/Max.

But how about other aspects, such as energy efficiency?

Not very good at all. AMD beats them still there. The laptop version will be very similar to the 10 core M1 Pro/Max while consuming about 2x more power at worst. However, the 27" iMac will get M1 Pro and Max. The Mac Pro will be the one with a desktop chip. (20/40 cores.) 2x/4x chiplet M1 Max design.

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

is that the default terminal? remember iTerm2 is not the default terminal

Yes it came pre-installed with macOS

medians wrote:

sorry for nustalgia but i had to

yeah OS X Leopard was indeed epic at that time

OOF - Look at the difference https://youtu.be/Al1OAg9Gin8

Getting MacOS on a PC is a pain and I've never been successful, at least not with a graphics card anyway. Best I can do is sluggish performance with my integrated graphics. The integrated graphics showing up properly but with 1 mb of vRAM apparently.

helloworldbyeworld wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

Intel's Core i9-12900HK has 4 extra E cores compared to M1, and those cores DO provide performance. This performance is VERY similar to M1 Pro (10 core). This chip has 14 cores, 8+6 compared to 8+2 for M1 Pro/Max.

But how about other aspects, such as energy efficiency?

THE MORE POWER THE BETTER, ALWAYS
having to degrade a potentially good CPU for battery, laptop issues. Maybe just innovate and make a larger battery.


laptops are just portable heaters anyway, they do nothing but overheat. Desktops are better!

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

Getting MacOS on a PC is a pain and I've never been successful, at least not with a graphics card anyway. Best I can do is sluggish performance with my integrated graphics. The integrated graphics showing up properly but with 1 mb of vRAM apparently.

you're not supposed to have macos on a pc, only if you own a mac and dont use the pc and mac at the same time

god286 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

Getting MacOS on a PC is a pain and I've never been successful, at least not with a graphics card anyway. Best I can do is sluggish performance with my integrated graphics. The integrated graphics showing up properly but with 1 mb of vRAM apparently.

you're not supposed to have macos on a pc, only if you own a mac and dont use the pc and mac at the same time

yeah yeah not supposed to, but I can. lmao. I don't at all go along with a company's restrictions

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

yeah yeah not supposed to, but I can. lmao. I don't at all go along with a company's restrictions

the government too i think as you agreed to the eula but ok

god286 wrote:

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

yeah yeah not supposed to, but I can. lmao. I don't at all go along with a company's restrictions

the government too i think as you agreed to the eula but ok

the only time you would actually get in trouble is if you did what one stupid company did and sell PCs with MacOS on them. They got sued harshly.

MagicCrayon9342 wrote:

helloworldbyeworld wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

Intel's Core i9-12900HK has 4 extra E cores compared to M1, and those cores DO provide performance. This performance is VERY similar to M1 Pro (10 core). This chip has 14 cores, 8+6 compared to 8+2 for M1 Pro/Max.

But how about other aspects, such as energy efficiency?

THE MORE POWER THE BETTER, ALWAYS
having to degrade a potentially good CPU for battery, laptop issues. Maybe just innovate and make a larger battery.


laptops are just portable heaters anyway, they do nothing but overheat. Desktops are better!

The limit literally is 100 watt hour battery and even with that it wouldn't last very long. If you put the chip in a laptop, it would throttle, have awful battery, and be very thick for thermal headroom. That's not true, AMD and Apple did it. I expect Intel to be similar to Apple with their laptop version of Alder Lake. In terms of power, in a couple of months, yes. Desktops are better in terms of power. Laptops have portability though, AMD/Apple (intel in a couple months too) are making chips that are very close to desktop chips that have more than 8/10 cores. (8 P cores!) Yes, that means when the laptop processors are upscaled to desktop processors, (for example 20/40 cores) the desktop will become more powerful than the laptop. People still worked with that desktop. People who need that kind of power can hook a laptop up to a monitor when they're not going anywhere, or use it as a laptop with no performance dips. Yes, some professionals (people who typically buy high-end desktops. low end desktops are basically laptops that aren't portable.) won't have enough power due to software compatibility and hardware compatibility. New generations with low-end performance upgrades means that there's more power at the same price and more power gets put into devices that are tiny! Laptops are very small so the fact that this much power is available to them is impressive. Generation by generation upgrades are typically monumental upgrades (such as Alder Lake), so that should not just be overlooked just because they're laptops. It's a good thing if we don't need to get a desktop to get more power. Keep in mind, 75% of people don't need that kind of power. Performance upgrades there still matter though! I've talked to a lot of people who have laptops and one of their complaints was that their laptop is slow. For example, let's look at M1, which is in the MacBook Air. The MacBook Air is a consumer product with a good price-tag. (No, it's not overpriced.) Multi-core performance isn't as good as high-end laptops, but it's still one of the best for laptops in it's price class. Single-core is one of the best even in desktop systems! A casual user benefits a lot from single-core performance because it makes everything snappy. Not to mention the optimization it as. The GPU is better than Intel integrated graphics, but it's not like a dedicated graphics level. That's expected as it's a thin, light, and fairly cheap notebook. (Here's a quick side to GPU on the desktop vs laptop argument. The RTX 3080 mobile is very impressive and good enough for nearly 100% people. Even Apple's iGPU's on their MacBook Pros are very good. By the way, iGPU means nothing. It doesn't make it slower or faster, it means nothing.) Along with that you get, portability, an amazing screen, a good keyboard, amazing trackpad, an OS that's based off Unix, (Only a good thing if you like Unix/macOS, which everyone doesn't.) amazing battery life, and a cool thermal system. You get all of that for $899. (Literally shop anywhere besides on Apple's website and you get that price.) A big improvement over the previous MacBook Air with an awful thermal system, average battery life, a worse screen, and pretty bad performance. All of that was fixed because Apple ended up making the switch from Intel to their own SOC. MacBook Air is only considered expensive and not for consumers because it's a premium product for consumers. I bought a Dell once, and it was awful. I mean the hardware, not Windows. (Which I don't really like.) Apple leads in performance per watt in their CPU, (over AMD and Intel) and their GPU. (NVIDIA.) When they make that Mac Pro with their own SOC, it'll beat the RTX 3090 in GPU performance and be a top-tier CPU without having thermal problems. That's why I wouldn't put off laptop power. Keep in mind, this started and is being upscaled from an IPHONE chip. Since Apple has a massive PPW lead, they will beat out laptop Alder Lake. They'll improve on PPW even more with M2. I wonder how well the PPW for Zen 4 will be…

By the way, please snip when replying to this.

Chiroyce wrote:

OOF - Look at the difference https://youtu.be/Al1OAg9Gin8

This is not really a good test because most people who will be buying the MacBook Pro will not be doing this kind of stuff. Unified Memory is good and if you're doing this kind of stuff, it's really good. It still isn't going to be that much of a difference for most people.

b1048546 wrote:

most people who will be buying the MacBook Pro will not be doing this kind of stuff

Is it too little or too much?

Chiroyce wrote:

b1048546 wrote:

most people who will be buying the MacBook Pro will not be doing this kind of stuff

Is it too little or too much?

Too little.

M2 GPU will likely be as good as the Radeon Pro 570 or RX 570. Very respectable! (10 core. I was going to show my math but it got longer than thousands and thousands of characters which is probably too long.)

mhmhm computer chips

016874 wrote:

mhmhm computer chips

yum delicious

I have got Low Power Mode and now my computer feels like an M1 computer without the performance and the silence of the fans…

god286 wrote:

016874 wrote:

mhmhm computer chips

yum delicious

I have got Low Power Mode and now my computer feels like an M1 computer without the performance and the silence of the fans…

exactly